Court of Appeal refuses permission for challenge to school site closure
The Court of Appeal has refused permission for an appeal of the High Court's decision to refuse permission for a judicial review challenge that argued a school's closure of a site used to educate children with social, emotional, and mental health (SEMH) needs was unlawful.
The claimant, who was a child with SEMH needs attending Pathfield School in Devon, attended the 'Discovery Centre', a separate location about half a mile from the main school site.
The Discovery Centre hosted the 'Pathways Unit', which had places for 23 learners with needs centred around SEMH.
In August 2024, the school's governors decided not to renew the Discovery Centre lease and to relocate the children being educated there to the main site.
Prior to the decision, Devon County Council had hosted a month-long consultation on the centre's closure.
The claimant later launched a judicial review of the decision. However, permission was refused on the papers by HHJ Jarman KC and then at an oral hearing before HHJ Keyser KC.
James Goudie KC and Ronnie Dennis, both of 11KBW, acted for Devon County Council in defending the claim.
On Coulson LJ’s refusal of permission, they said: "The School Governors had not been required to follow the statutory consultation process in the School Organisation (Prescribed Alterations to Maintained Schools) (England) Regulations 2013 before deciding not to renew the lease of the Discovery Centre.
"That was not 'a change in the type of special educational needs for which the school is organised to make provision' (Sch. 2 para 9)."
They added: “The school was organised to make provision for children with Severe Learning Difficulties (SLD) and Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties (PMLD), rather than SEMH. This was set out in the institution's admissions policy and acknowledged by Ofsted and Devon County Council.”
Goudie and Dennis said: "The fact that the school had been educating some children outside their core designation could not be used to the school's detriment; otherwise schools in the same position would not accept any pupil outside their core designation for fear of triggering a raft of further statutory obligations."
Adam Carey
